I must admit, I don't often try to do this, but I thought Adobe had fixed the error message back in CS4.

Yes, sure, all the politics of backsaving are one thing. But at least the error message should be intelliglble!

There's really no excuse for a user not knowing what the problem is.

Of course, we can't expect CS4 to be fixed to check this now that CS5 is out. And the hours are definitely waining on the likelyhood of a CS5 maintenance update improving the error message for CS5.5. Maybe if we're very lucky the CS5.5 error message can be fixed to deal properly with CS6 files?

Is anyone aware of any discussion about this? Maybe I'll try to file a really compelling bug report, but I want to sit on it for a bit.

The addition of a new item of data per paragraph style. For this case, it seems to be the HTML tag.

There are a couple of different scenarios possible for "new version awareness", such as blindly ignoring any stuff that's not recognized. See Word's behavior for an example of that, and shudder with the thought ID should be so fickle. It's not so easy to do it right, apparently.

A dot upgrade can't be saved to same CS version? CS5 should open any dot version CS5.

Perhaps you were expecting this .5 update to have only changed in import, export, and interface options? Besides, this is the first .5 version since InDesign 1.5.

OMG, I have the same problem! I upgraded and now my printer can't open. This will be a continuous nightmare! Why does Adobe punish us for upgrading???????? I have a 24 page catalog, and if that baby reflows I'm going to lose my mind!

Adobe is nothing but a monopoly that sucks an obscene amount of money out of us every year to keep the programs updated. Even for students and teachers, they sock it to us with no upgrades. Every year it's an outlay of several hundreds of dollars to be able to open files without having to export them to save down. Oh for the days of Quark Xpress when we could simply save our files down at least two versions. Adobe should be ashamed of themselves. Bastards are crying their way to the bank!!!

Oh, you can still use Quark if you want. but you will not be able to save more than one version backwards! Adobe has no monopoly. Hey there are many other products on the market! The only problem what Adobe has is that its competitors did not have such a development of functionality in each new version as Adobe's InDesign had and will have.

Or you can stuck with any old version o InDesign you have. No one will force you to upgrade your program.

BTW: InDesign can save/export in IDML which is backward compatible 2 versions: IDML saved in CS5.5 are compatible to CS5 and CS4!

Try telling students who barely have two nickels to rub together these days that they have to outlay $400-500 dollars every year to be able to keep up to date with the programs at their schools. I can barely get these kids to package their files properly and now they have to remember to export their files to idml and remember to put them in their folders before they copy it onto their external hard drive to bring it home to work on. Is it really necessary to update every bloody year and charge these kids so much to upgrade. And this time only for a .5 upgrade? A lot of these kids have parents that are sacrificing every thing to pay for their kids college education. What message is adobe sending to these kids? That the study of graphic design is only for the rich who can afford to upgrade every year. Have a heart in this economy.

CS4 was released 3 years ago, and can still open IDML files created in CS5.5, which will be the most recent version for at least until sometime next year. I don't think that's unreasonable at all; 3-4 years is a really long time in computer terms, and it's completely unrealistic to expect not to have to update at least once during that time.

The study of graphic design is definitely not just for the rich (there are great free and open-source options available), but using a production-quality software suite is obviously going to require some investment. Computers and software are the only necessary overhead for a designer - I'd say that as far as professions go, it's one of the cheapest ones to get into.

As for students not being able to handle a File > Export > IDML... Well I'd say you have bigger problems on your hands than just updating software.

Oh students… they can buy edu versions. When I did my university degree not even one such version did exist in the late 80s. edu-versions are really cheap.Don't claim. IDML is basic and if someone learns a software he has to learn basics.

I suppose compared to the professional versions, you can call the educational versions "cheap", but in reality $360-600 depending on the software they need is for most students a huge added burden to their already strapped wallets. Especially when this outlay is yearly if they want to keep up to date with the school's software. As for the other gentlemen's comment about them having bigger problems than worrying about exporting as an idml, that's a bit smug. I guess it's been so long, he forgot what it is like to be a student and trying to remember all the file formatting, proper resolution for all the different outputs, proper color formats, resizing images for print, etc that all we professionals just automatically do without having to think about it. Unless you are in the trenches with these kids seeing their struggles first hand with expenses and everything else, you guys really can't cast stones. So just sit up their in your successful little white towers and keep staying out of touch with reality.

Try telling students who barely have two nickels to rub together these days that they have to outlay $400-500 dollars every year to be able to keep up to date with the programs at their schools. I can barely get these kids to package their files properly and now they have to remember to export their files to idml and remember to put them in their folders before they copy it onto their external hard drive to bring it home to work on. Is it really necessary to update every bloody year and charge these kids so much to upgrade. And this time only for a .5 upgrade? A lot of these kids have parents that are sacrificing every thing to pay for their kids college education. What message is adobe sending to these kids? That the study of graphic design is only for the rich who can afford to upgrade every year. Have a heart in this economy.

This has NOTHING to do with Adobe. Talk to your school administration -- they're the ones who make the decisions to upgrade the technology on campus. And how is it that students are not expected to budget for software along with books? Not so long ago I expected to pay $500 - $1000 PER SEMESTER for my daughter's texts.

Student pricing for Adobe products is an absolute bargain. The only difference between the education versions and commercial is the transferability of the license and the lack of an "educational" upgrade. Typically, however, the education price for a complete new license is less than the upgrade price for the commercial license by a few dollars. Basically, what this policy means is that students get a healthy discount to get started, but if they want to continue with new versions thay must either buy another education license while they still quyalify, or upgrade to a full commercial license by buying the regular upgrade, which will work equally well at upgrading the education versions.

Try telling students who barely have two nickels to rub together these days that they have to outlay $400-500 dollars every year to be able to keep up to date with the programs at their schools. I can barely get these kids to package their files properly and now they have to remember to export their files to idml and remember to put them in their folders before they copy it onto their external hard drive to bring it home to work on. Is it really necessary to update every bloody year and charge these kids so much to upgrade. And this time only for a .5 upgrade? A lot of these kids have parents that are sacrificing every thing to pay for their kids college education. What message is adobe sending to these kids? That the study of graphic design is only for the rich who can afford to upgrade every year. Have a heart in this economy.

Your points about the hardship of expensive learning materials, and the extra work involved in saving to IDML, are all valid.

If/when online applications come into common use, some of the issues may fade away, because the newest and older versions will always be available for a user to choose from.

In the meantime, perhaps some of these suggestions will be useful:

* Adobe's volume licensing plan (VLP, I think) and transactional licensing plan (TLP) have been mentioned in this forum, in regard to the option of buying licenses for earlier releases. My thought is that your school could "freeze" their installations at a useful recent release, to extend the useful life of a student's own purchased educational copy. Search Google for terms like "InDesign volume license transactional license" without quotes. Also, perhaps someone who knows more about these options will jump in here.

* Unless there are compelling class needs for the new features in new releases, there's no need to upgrade. Depending on the course's level, some features wouldn't be needed for lower-level classes; for the higher-level classes, use the newer software.

* If possible, allow students to install DropBox, or other online storage software, on the school computers, so they can save files remotely, and access them from any Internet connection. This won't eliminate the saving to IDML step, but it can eliminate the copy-to-transport-media step, simplifying things a bit. There may be security and other IT issues here to be worked out.

* For students who intend to enter the design career, it may be less expensive to buy an upgradeable non-educational license, or even - shudder - a subscription. Subscriptions, I believe, can be activated and deactivated for specific periods, like rental cars, so, for example, if/when a student graduates and takes a job where the employer provides the software, or the student doesn't need the software for a semester or quarter, the subscription can be idled, and there's no cost. If the student becomes an independent designer, the subscription can be reactivated when there's work to be done. I believe Bob Levine once posted a comparison, on this forum, of cost-to-license InDesign, for subscriptions vs. other licensing methods. Bob?

Sometimes folks compare the ongoing cost of software and upgrades to other industries and careers that don't seem to have the same issues. However, the tools needed in many industries and careers are no longer so static, as in the past. Carpenters who worked with manual tools could use hammers, screwdrivers, etc., until they wore out or broke, but the introduction of electric nail drivers, screwdrivers, and drills forced production carpenters to upgrade their tools. Perhaps the increased output of mechanized tools balanced their increased cost. Draftsmen's triangles, T-squares, pens, etc., don't need upgrades, but there have been about 20 AutoCAD software releases for them to keep up with.

Recently I had to replace my 1991 stick-shift car with a "new-to-me" 2005 model. It's like all the newer cars I've rented at times - automatic everything. I've done most maintenance and repair on the old one, and I always carried tools in case something broke on the road, and I could fix it myself. The new car is a disaster; the only fixing and maintenance I might possibly do is change a flat tire, add fuel, window-washer juice, oil, power brake and steering fluids, wash the exterior, vacuum the interior, set radio-station presets, and change the battery in the remote-control device that opens and locks the doors, and activates the entire computerized beast. There's nothing for me to do but open the doors, get in, turn on the engine, and aim in some direction.

Mechanics, whose basic-level wrenches and ignition-timing strobe lights were capable of doing an amazing range of tasks over decades of model changes, now need annual expensive software upgrades for the computerized tools that troubleshoot and maintain the modern rolling computers that have replaced cars as some of us knew them.

I totally agree with your comments. I didn't for one second think that the CS5.5 version I was buying wouldn't be compatible with our CS5 version. Downgrade is not an option and £333 for upgrade is not realistic.

Not a soul expect that a dot upgrade is not FULLY compatible with the number software. If Microsoft tried to do this it would so many suits against it that there would be a shortage of lawyers in the USA.

Everything would be nice if one could buy a simple 5.0 version, none available from our suppliers, didn't even ask! So, being of a sound mind and respectful of the intellectual value of the work done by Adobe, we bought a new copy of CS Design Standard, after all this is what we needed, we already have a copy of Design Premium and a Master Collection one, plus 4 copies of InCopy CS 5.0 or should I say 3 CS 5.0 and a CS 5.5, haven't seen the disaster on this yet.

Should I then fork an extra $1,000 to upgrade our licenses for Premium and Master? For what? Not talking about InCopy yet by the way.

This is not asking much. Inside the same number version, a NEW or OPEN file to the version file format. This would disable the new 'features' obviously and would save to the native number edition. For backward compatibility to a ONE lower number version (from 6 to 5 as an exemple) Adobe must providethe same NEW or OPEN file option as a low cost upgrade. From 6 to 4, get real.

But that was when Quark ruled, we the Adobe people being a very lower caste, not even worthy of being in the business.

Then there is the future and Adobe would be well to remember the past. One of the reasons why InDesign was able to catch on early this century was the incredible price discrepancy on the Quark pricing for English and non-English versions of its program, so guess who is the major sponsor of Scribus? The Francophonie. If an international organisation can get behind a free product, who’s next? Maybe the Ben Franklin Project http://jrcbenfranklinproject.wordpress.com ? Are they using Scribus?

As our newspaper moves to the cloud to produce its print edition, not a penny of profit to be made on the WEB for 99% of the newspaper on the planet, profit being the sum that remains with you when you subtract cost from revenue, this may well be the last time that we buy a copy of software from Adobe.

If they want any of our hard won money they will have to show us some respect and in this case we are insulted.

Since you managed to find this ancient thread, did you also find the information about buying CS 5.5 though a volume license plan and getting the CS5 downgrade with it? You can buy as few as one license that way, and you have 30 days to return the regular retail versions you just bought.

As for your solution, I'll try to explain this to my supplier, who is losing a sale, and the leasing company.

We've done the math by the way, as is, CS5 is an excellent product that can and will serve us well for the next couple of years, then most of what we do will move to the cloud. Going into the subscription models would mean that we would be paying every 2 years for the software.

We have gone from CS suite 2.0 to 5.0. I do not see the benefit of Epub financially, maybe someone could show us a small newspaper in this whole wide world that makes money from its web site. I've been asking the question for almost 10 years, never got an answer.

Since I'm celebrating my 25th year this fall with an email address, please refrain from the Luddites reminders.

The question is simple: How come a dot upgrade becomes a new version? With no backward capability, unless ones count the export function as such and this one is and always has been a fix, not a solution.

And the answer is just as simple…because that is the way it has always been. New features preclude being able to simply open a new version’s file in an older version.

This is not a first. InDesign 1.5 could not save back to 1.0 and in fact even the ability to export back was not added until InDesign CS2.

The fact is that this industry is changing at light speed right now. Between EPUB, DPS and web, I’m doing almost no print work at all. Adobe needs to keep up with the changes to the definition of publishing even if you want to brush it aside.

In my opinion it maybe should not have been labeled as a dot upgrade, but most other products in the suite didn't get enough extensive overhaul to justify a full version jump. The re-written e-pub features are not compatible with the CS5 release, but users want them as quickly as possible, which sets up a dilemma. A corporate decision was made that the technology is changing too fast to wait for a full upgrade cycle (18 months to 2 years) to bring the new usability to to those who want/need it, and the switch to alternate year half-steps was the way to go. The cost of the upgrade is high, in my opinion, but less than the cost of a full step. InDesign .5 version files have never been comaptible with the previous .0 version (last time this happened was with version 1). I don't like it, but I understand it. I think, personally, that Adobe should leave the .0 versions in the pipeline soo users have a choice, or make previous versions available for a fee for new users who are in the situation where they start a new license stream in mid-version, but I don't get to vote on that.

It certainly is unfortunate that may users such as yourself discover AFTER buying CS5.5 that their files are not directly backward compatible, but they can be used by running through .idml. While we made a point of posting about this here when CS5.5 was released, I won't go as far as saying that means everyone should have known. An announcement on the web page in the product description would have been a good PR move.

I agree with Bob Levine that most graphic work done today, worldwide, is not print based. I would counterpoint by saying that, still, print job brings a majority of the revenue to most designers outside of the major metro area in North America. I'm talking about designers who make a living from what they do obviously.

I appreciate the correction on Version 1.5, we started with 2.0.

And I just learned that Scribus suffers from the same malady as InDesign, files are not backward compatible... As for Quark, the less said...

What I'm complaining about is not the fact that full number version can have totally different files system and that as such they cannot be read by lower version, but in this case I cannot legally buy (apart from Adobe and only if and this and that) a copy of CS 5.0 from any legit vendor today. If I had known, I would have spend my money ($1,285 CDN to be exact) differently.

idml exporting is nice when it works as advertised, then there is text reflow, styles going nowhere. It is a fix, not a solution.

If Adobe rewrote the program in another computing language, what I read elsewhere, then it is not a dot upgrade, its a full number upgrade.

Let's not forget the promise of a INX plugins years ago, never materialize.

As Peter said, it may have been said that ID 5.5 files were not backward compatible on the Adobe forum, but his was not advertize much. And there was no way, in September to buy a legal copy of CS 5.0 from an authorized supplier.

There are two ways of looking at a solution for this. Either Adobe provide a NEW AS and OPEN AS pluging for ID 5.X, from the look of it doesn't seem a reasonable thing to ask or maybe cannot be done safely, (the reason for the INX plugging pullout if I remember) or offer a free downgrade to anyone who wants to use InDesign 5.0. along with 5.5 if they so wish (and if this is possible, it could be interesting to hear if anyone is running both version in Win). With the understanding that this apply only to a dot upgrade, for all products, when a backward file compatibility issue arise.

Then, Adobe's obligation would only to provide security patches and RAW files upgrade for existing customers of a previous dot upgrade or update.

If you need the feature, pay for it. But do not force people into piracy.